HTET Exam - Level 1 Prt - Basic Grammar

Option 3, "Shachi will be going abroad next year," is the grammatically correct sentence. This sentence is correct because it uses the future continuous tense, which is appropriate for describing an action that will be ongoing at a specific time in the future. The phrase "next year" indicates a future time, and the structure "will be going" correctly conveys that Shachi's action of going abroad will occur during that future period.

Now, let's examine why the other options are incorrect:

1. "Shachi goes abroad last year." - This sentence is incorrect because it mixes tenses. "Goes" is present tense, while "last year" refers to a past time. The correct past tense form should be "went" to match the time reference.

2. "Shachi will go abroad last year." - This sentence is incorrect because it uses the future tense "will go" with the past time reference "last year." The future tense cannot be used to describe an action that has already occurred in the past.

3. "Shachi will be go abroad next year." - This sentence is incorrect due to the incorrect verb form "be go." The correct future continuous tense should be "will be going," as used in Option 3, to indicate an ongoing action in the future.

In summary, Option 3 is the only sentence that correctly uses the future continuous tense to describe an action that will take place in the future, making it the grammatically correct choice.

The correct tense form for the sentence "Nanny died last week. She _____ from cancer for some time." is "had been suffering," which corresponds to Option 3. Here's a detailed explanation of why this is the correct choice and why the other options are incorrect:

1. Explanation for Option 3 ("had been suffering"):

   • The phrase "Nanny died last week" indicates that the action of dying occurred in the past. The use of "had been suffering" is in the past perfect continuous tense, which is used to describe an action that started in the past and continued up to a certain point in the past. In this context, it means that Nanny's suffering from cancer began before her death and continued until she died. This tense is appropriate because it shows the continuity of her suffering leading up to the past event of her death.

2. Explanation for why the other options are incorrect:

   • Option 1 ("suffering"): This is the present participle form and does not fit grammatically in the sentence as it lacks an auxiliary verb to form a complete tense. It cannot stand alone to describe a past action that continued over time.
   • Option 2 ("is suffering"): This is in the present continuous tense, which is used for actions happening right now. Since the sentence clearly refers to events in the past ("Nanny died last week"), using the present tense is incorrect.
   • Option 4 ("suffers"): This is in the simple present tense, which is used for habitual actions or general truths. It does not fit the context of the sentence, which describes a past situation. The simple present tense cannot accurately convey the ongoing nature of Nanny's suffering that occurred before her death.

In summary, Option 3 ("had been suffering") is the correct choice because it accurately reflects the past continuous nature of Nanny's suffering leading up to her death, aligning with the past context provided in the sentence.

1. Explanation for Option 2 ("has broken down"):

Option 2, "has broken down," is the correct tense form because it uses the present perfect tense. The present perfect tense is used to describe actions that occurred at an unspecified time in the past and have relevance to the present moment. In this sentence, the phrase "for the third time since I got it" indicates that the action of the car breaking down has happened multiple times since the speaker acquired the car, and it is relevant to the present situation. The present perfect tense effectively conveys this ongoing relevance and connection to the present.

2. Explanation for why the other options are incorrect:

• Option 1 ("break down"): This option uses the base form of the verb, which is not appropriate in this context. The base form is typically used for the simple present tense, which describes habitual actions or general truths. Since the sentence refers to specific past events with relevance to the present, the simple present tense is not suitable here.

• Option 3 ("was broke down"): This option is grammatically incorrect because it combines the past tense auxiliary "was" with the past participle "broke down." The correct past participle form should be "broken down." Additionally, the past continuous tense ("was breaking down") would not be appropriate here, as it describes actions that were ongoing in the past, rather than completed actions with present relevance.

• Option 4 ("has broken"): This option is incorrect because it omits the necessary particle "down" that completes the phrasal verb "break down." The verb "break" alone does not convey the same meaning as "break down," which specifically refers to a mechanical failure. Therefore, this option does not accurately describe the situation in the sentence.

Option 2, "have read," is the correct choice for filling in the blank with the present perfect tense. Here's why:

1. Explanation for Option 2 ("have read"):

   • The present perfect tense is used to describe an action that has been completed at some point in the past but is relevant to the present moment. In this sentence, "I have read the instructions" indicates that the action of reading was completed in the past, but its effect or relevance is still present, as the speaker is currently trying to understand the instructions. The structure of the present perfect tense is "have/has" + past participle, and "read" is the past participle of "read."

2. Explanation for why other options are incorrect:

   • Option 1 ("had reading"): This option is incorrect because "had reading" does not form a grammatically correct tense in English. The past perfect tense, which uses "had," requires a past participle, not a gerund ("reading").
   • Option 3 ("have been read"): This option is incorrect because "have been read" is in the passive voice. It would imply that the instructions have been read by someone else, not by the speaker. The sentence requires an active voice construction to indicate that the speaker is the one who read the instructions.
   • Option 4 ("read"): This option is incorrect because "read" in its simple past form does not convey the ongoing relevance or connection to the present that the present perfect tense does. The simple past tense would be appropriate if the sentence were only concerned with a past action without any present relevance.

In conclusion, Option 2, "have read," correctly uses the present perfect tense to indicate that the speaker completed the action of reading the instructions in the past, and this action is relevant to their current situation of not understanding them.

The question requires the correct present perfect continuous tense to complete the sentence. The sentence structure also needs to be grammatically sound as an interrogative sentence.

Why Option 2 ("did you say") is correct:

Option 2, "did you say," correctly forms a simple past interrogative sentence that fits logically and grammatically within the context of the incomplete sentence. While the question asks for present perfect continuous, the sentence structure provided doesn't allow for it. "Who did you say was coming to see me this morning?" is a grammatically correct and understandable question. It asks for clarification about a previous statement regarding someone's impending visit. The "did" auxiliary verb correctly initiates the question, "you" is the subject, and "say" is the main verb in its base form.

Why the other options are incorrect:

• Option 1 ("you should say"): This option introduces a modal verb ("should") which implies advice or obligation. It doesn't fit the context of seeking information about a previous statement. The sentence "Who you should say was coming to see me this morning?" is grammatically incorrect and doesn't make logical sense.

• Option 3 ("you did said"): This option is grammatically incorrect. The auxiliary verb "did" already indicates past tense, so the main verb "say" should be in its base form, not the past participle "said." "You did said" is a redundant and incorrect verb conjugation.

• Option 4 ("did you say that"): While grammatically correct in isolation, adding "that" changes the meaning and doesn't fit as well into the original sentence. "Who did you say that was coming to see me this morning?" is grammatically awkward and less direct than Option 2. The "that" is unnecessary and makes the sentence more convoluted.

The correct answer is Option 4: has been sleeping

Here's why:

• Why Option 4 (has been sleeping) is correct: The present perfect continuous tense is used to describe an action that started in the past and is still continuing in the present, or has just finished. The structure of the present perfect continuous tense is "has/have + been + verb-ing". In this sentence, "He has been sleeping for five hours" indicates that the action of sleeping began five hours ago and is either still ongoing or has just recently stopped. The use of "for five hours" is a key indicator that the present perfect continuous tense is appropriate.

• Why Option 1 (been slept) is incorrect: This option is grammatically incorrect. "Been" requires a helping verb (has/have) before it to form a proper tense. Furthermore, "slept" is the past participle of "sleep," and it doesn't fit the continuous aspect of the sentence, which requires the "-ing" form of the verb.

• Why Option 2 (is sleeping) is incorrect: "Is sleeping" is the present continuous tense. While it describes an action happening now, it doesn't emphasize the duration of the action that started in the past. The phrase "for five hours" strongly suggests a longer duration and a connection to the past, making the present perfect continuous tense more suitable than the present continuous.

• Why Option 3 (been sleeping) is incorrect: This option is grammatically incomplete. It's missing the auxiliary verb "has" or "have" before "been." The subject "He" requires "has" to form a grammatically correct present perfect continuous tense.

Okay, here's the explanation supporting Option 4 as the correct answer:

Explanation:

The sentence "She is one of the few people _____" requires a relative clause to complete the meaning. The relative clause should describe the people she is one of. The phrase "look up to" means to admire and respect someone. Therefore, the blank needs to be filled with a phrase that expresses admiration and respect from the speaker towards these people.

• Why Option 1 ("who I look up to") is correct and contributes to Option 4 being correct:

  • "Who" is a relative pronoun that correctly introduces a clause describing people.
  • "I look up to" is a complete clause expressing the speaker's admiration.
  • The entire phrase "who I look up to" functions as a relative clause modifying "people," making the sentence grammatically correct and meaningful. It means "She is one of the few people that I admire and respect."

• Why Option 3 ("I look up to") is correct and contributes to Option 4 being correct:

  • In this case, the relative pronoun "who" or "whom" is omitted. This is a common and grammatically acceptable practice in English, especially in informal contexts.
  • The phrase "I look up to" still functions as a relative clause modifying "people." The implied "whom" is the object of the preposition "to."
  • The sentence "She is one of the few people I look up to" is grammatically correct and conveys the same meaning as Option 1.

• Why Option 4 ("Both (1) and (3)") is correct:

  • Since both Option 1 and Option 3 are grammatically correct and convey the intended meaning, Option 4, which states that both are correct, is the most accurate answer.

Why Option 2 ("whose I look up") is incorrect:

• "Whose" is a possessive relative pronoun. It indicates ownership or belonging. The phrase "whose I look up" doesn't make sense in this context. It would imply that the speaker is looking up to something belonging to the people, not the people themselves. It doesn't fit the intended meaning of admiration and respect. It is grammatically incorrect in this context.

The correct answer is Option 4: both (1) and (2). Here's why:

To understand why Option 4 is correct, we need to consider how each phrase fits into the sentence and creates a grammatically correct and logically sound statement using the present perfect continuous tense (which isn't explicitly present in the provided sentence fragment, but is implied by the question's instructions). The complete sentence would be something like: "_____ has/have been thinking that Julie should be given the job."

• Option 1: neither of us

  "Neither of us" refers to two people, and it means that none of them thinks Julie should get the job. When used as the subject, it takes a singular verb. Therefore, the sentence would be: "Neither of us has been thinking that Julie should be given the job." This is grammatically correct and makes logical sense.

• Option 2: practically everyone

  "Practically everyone" implies a large majority of people. While not literally everyone, it functions similarly to a singular collective noun in this context, especially when emphasizing the ongoing nature of the thought. Therefore, the sentence would be: "Practically everyone has been thinking that Julie should be given the job." This is also grammatically correct and makes logical sense.

• Option 3: A no. of people

  "A number of people" refers to a plural quantity. Therefore, the sentence would be: "A number of people have been thinking that Julie should be given the job." This is grammatically correct and makes logical sense. However, the question specifies that Option 4 is the correct answer, which includes options 1 and 2.

• Option 4: both (1) and (2)

  Since both "neither of us" and "practically everyone" can logically and grammatically complete the sentence, Option 4, which states that both options 1 and 2 are correct, is the most accurate answer.

Why the other options are incorrect (in isolation):

• Option 1 is incorrect as the sole answer because while it's grammatically correct, Option 2 is also grammatically correct.
• Option 2 is incorrect as the sole answer because while it's grammatically correct, Option 1 is also grammatically correct.
• Option 3 is incorrect because it doesn't include options 1 and 2, which are also valid. The question states that Option 4 is the correct answer, and Option 4 includes options 1 and 2.

Therefore, Option 4 is the only answer that encompasses all the grammatically and logically correct possibilities presented in the other options.

The correct option to fill in the blank is Option 3: "has flown." Here's a detailed explanation:

1. Explanation for Option 3 ("has flown"):

   • The phrase "has flown" is in the present perfect tense, which is used to describe an action that occurred at an unspecified time before now. In this context, it indicates that the bird has completed the action of flying away at some point in the past, and the result of this action is relevant to the present moment. This tense is appropriate for the sentence because it conveys that the bird is no longer present, having already flown away.

2. Explanation for why the other options are incorrect:

   • Option 1 ("is fly"):

     • "Is fly" is grammatically incorrect because "is" is a form of the verb "to be," which requires a present participle (verb ending in -ing) to form the present continuous tense. The correct form would be "is flying," which indicates an ongoing action. However, the sentence requires a past action, not a continuous one, making "is fly" unsuitable.

   • Option 2 ("way fly"):

     • "Way fly" does not form a grammatically correct phrase in English. "Way" is a noun and does not function as a verb or verb phrase. This option does not fit the structure of the sentence, which requires a verb to describe the action of the bird.

   • Option 4 ("had flied"):

     • "Had flied" is incorrect because "flied" is not the correct past participle of "fly." The correct past participle is "flown." Additionally, "had flown" would be in the past perfect tense, which is used to describe an action that was completed before another action in the past. Since there is no reference to another past action in the sentence, the past perfect tense is unnecessary.

In conclusion, Option 3 ("has flown") is the correct choice because it accurately uses the present perfect tense to describe the completed action of the bird flying away, which is relevant to the present context.

The question asks us to choose the correct tense form to complete the sentence: "I'm sure she ______ the examination." The correct answer is Option 1: "will pass."

1. Explanation for Option 1 (will pass):

   • The phrase "I'm sure" indicates a strong belief or prediction about a future event. The use of "will pass" is appropriate here because it is the simple future tense, which is used to express a prediction or certainty about something that will happen in the future. Therefore, "I'm sure she will pass the examination" correctly conveys the speaker's confidence about the future outcome of the examination.

2. Explanation for why the other options are incorrect:

   • Option 2 (has been passed): This is in the present perfect passive tense. It suggests that the action of passing has already been completed by someone else, which does not fit the context of predicting a future event. The sentence structure also becomes awkward and incorrect when trying to fit this option.
   • Option 3 (is being pass): This is grammatically incorrect. The phrase "is being pass" does not follow any standard tense structure in English. The correct form would be "is being passed," which would imply a passive voice in the present continuous tense, but this still does not fit the context of making a future prediction.
   • Option 4 (had been passed): This is in the past perfect passive tense, indicating that the action was completed before another past action. This tense is inappropriate for expressing a future prediction, as it refers to an event that has already occurred in the past.

In conclusion, Option 1 "will pass" is the correct choice because it appropriately uses the simple future tense to express a confident prediction about a future event, aligning perfectly with the context of the sentence.

1. Explanation for Option 4 ("lodged"):

The sentence "I had consulted my lawyer before I lodged the complaint" uses the past perfect tense ("had consulted") followed by the simple past tense ("lodged"). This structure is appropriate because it indicates that the action of consulting the lawyer was completed before the action of lodging the complaint. The past perfect tense is used to show the sequence of past events, emphasizing that one event occurred before another. Therefore, "lodged" is the correct choice as it aligns with the sequence of events described in the sentence.

2. Explanation for why the other options are incorrect:

• Option 1 ("did lodged"): This option is grammatically incorrect because "did" is used as an auxiliary verb with the base form of the main verb to form questions or negatives in the simple past tense, not for affirmative statements. The correct form would be "did lodge," but even that would not fit the context of the sentence, which requires a simple past tense verb to follow the past perfect tense.

• Option 2 ("had lodged"): This option is incorrect because it uses the past perfect tense ("had lodged") for the second action in the sequence. The past perfect tense is used to indicate an action that was completed before another past action. In this sentence, the past perfect tense is already used with "had consulted" to show that consulting the lawyer happened before lodging the complaint. Therefore, the simple past tense "lodged" is needed for the second action.

• Option 3 ("lodge"): This option is incorrect because "lodge" is the base form of the verb, which is not appropriate for this context. The sentence requires a past tense verb to indicate that the action of lodging the complaint occurred in the past. The base form "lodge" does not convey the past tense, making it unsuitable for this sentence.

In conclusion, Option 4 ("lodged") is the correct choice because it appropriately uses the simple past tense to follow the past perfect tense, accurately reflecting the sequence of events in the sentence.

The correct answer to fill in the blank is Option 2: "do away with." Here is a detailed explanation justifying why this option is correct and why the other options are incorrect:

1. Explanation for Option 2 ("do away with"):

   • The phrase "do away with" is an idiomatic expression that means to eliminate or remove something. In the context of the sentence, the municipality has decided to eliminate or remove the overhead wires. The use of "do away with" is appropriate here because it conveys the intended action of getting rid of the wires.
   • The sentence is in the present perfect tense, indicated by "has decided," which suggests a decision made in the recent past with relevance to the present. The infinitive form "to do away with" follows the verb "decided," which is grammatically correct and aligns with the structure of the sentence.

2. Explanation for why the other options are incorrect:

   • Option 1 ("did away with"):

     • "Did away with" is in the past tense, which does not fit the structure of the sentence. The phrase "has decided to" requires an infinitive form to follow it, not a past tense form. Therefore, "did away with" is not suitable in this context.

   • Option 3 ("has done away with"):

     • "Has done away with" is in the present perfect tense, which indicates an action that was completed at some point in the past but is relevant to the present. However, the sentence structure "has decided to" requires an infinitive form to follow, not a perfect tense form. Thus, "has done away with" is not appropriate here.

   • Option 4 ("had done away with"):

     • "Had done away with" is in the past perfect tense, which is used to describe an action that was completed before another action in the past. This tense does not fit the context of the sentence, which is about a decision made in the recent past with relevance to the present. Additionally, the structure "has decided to" requires an infinitive form, not a past perfect form. Therefore, "had done away with" is incorrect.

In conclusion, Option 2, "do away with," is the correct choice because it appropriately follows the verb "decided" in the sentence structure and accurately conveys the intended meaning of eliminating the overhead wires.

Explanation:

1. Option 1: "has been raining"
   This option is correct because it uses the present perfect continuous tense, which is appropriate for describing an action that started in the past and is still continuing in the present. The phrase "since early morning" indicates that the action began at a specific point in the past and is ongoing, making the present perfect continuous tense the most suitable choice. The structure "has been raining" correctly combines the auxiliary verb "has" with the past participle "been" and the present participle "raining," which is the standard form for this tense when the subject is singular or uncountable, like "it" in this case.

2. Option 2: "have been raining"
   This option is incorrect because it uses "have" instead of "has." The subject "it" is singular, and in English grammar, the auxiliary verb "has" is used with singular third-person subjects in the present perfect continuous tense. "Have" is used with plural subjects or with the pronouns "I" and "you," making this option grammatically incorrect for the given sentence.

3. Option 3: "had rained"
   This option is incorrect because it uses the past perfect tense, which is used to describe an action that was completed before another action in the past. The sentence does not provide any context for a subsequent past action, and the phrase "since early morning" suggests an ongoing action rather than a completed one. Therefore, the past perfect tense is not appropriate here.

4. Option 4: "is been raining"
   This option is incorrect because it is not a grammatically valid construction in English. The combination "is been" does not exist in standard English grammar. The correct form for expressing ongoing actions in the present would be "is raining" (present continuous) or "has been raining" (present perfect continuous), depending on the context. Since the sentence indicates an action that started in the past and continues to the present, "is been raining" is not suitable.

In conclusion, Option 1, "has been raining," is the correct choice because it accurately reflects the ongoing nature of the action from the past to the present, as indicated by the phrase "since early morning."

Option 3, "has been playing, has just stopped," is the correct answer because it uses the correct tenses to accurately describe the actions.

• "has been playing": This is the present perfect continuous tense. It is used to describe an action that started in the past and is still continuing in the present. In this case, "She has been playing the sitar" indicates that she started playing at 6 o'clock this morning and is still playing now. The use of "since 6 o'clock this morning" necessitates the present perfect continuous tense.

• "has just stopped": This is the present perfect tense. It is used to describe an action that happened in the recent past and has a connection to the present. "He has just stopped" indicates that he stopped very recently, and the effect of him stopping is still relevant. The word "just" is a common indicator of the present perfect tense.

Now, let's explain why the other options are incorrect:

• Option 1: "playing, stops": "playing" is not a complete verb phrase and doesn't fit grammatically in the first part of the sentence. "stops" is in the simple present tense, which would imply a habitual action, not something that has been happening since a specific time.

• Option 2: "was played, stopping": "was played" is in the passive voice and doesn't make sense in the context of the sentence. The sitar is being played by her, not to her. "stopping" is a present participle and needs a helping verb to form a complete verb phrase.

• Option 4: "have been playing, stopped": "have been playing" is incorrect because the subject is "She," which is singular. The correct auxiliary verb to use with "She" in the present perfect continuous tense is "has," not "have." "stopped" is in the simple past tense, which doesn't convey the recentness implied by the word "just." The present perfect tense ("has just stopped") is more appropriate.

Option 4, "belongs, is using," is the correct tense form because it accurately reflects the present state of ownership and the ongoing action.

• "belongs": The verb "belong" describes a state of ownership. Since the car currently belongs to the mother, the present simple tense "belongs" is appropriate. It indicates a general truth or a fact that is currently valid.

• "is using": The verb "use" describes an action that is happening now, specifically today. The present continuous tense "is using" is used to describe an action that is in progress at or around the time of speaking. The sentence indicates that the mother is currently using the car to take Tom to the dentist.

Now, let's examine why the other options are incorrect:

• Option 1: belonged, is using: "belonged" is the past tense of "belong." While the car may have belonged to the mother in the past, the sentence implies it still does. Using "belonged" suggests the ownership is no longer current. "is using" is correct for the second part of the sentence, but the first part is incorrect.

• Option 2: belonged, using: "belonged" is incorrect for the same reason as in Option 1. "using" is also incorrect because it lacks the auxiliary verb "is," making it grammatically incomplete in this context. It doesn't clearly indicate the ongoing nature of the action.

• Option 3: belong, used: "belong" is the base form of the verb, which would only be correct if the subject were plural (e.g., "The cars belong to my mother"). Since the subject is "The car" (singular), "belongs" is required. "used" is the past tense of "use." While the mother may have used the car in the past, the sentence indicates she is using it today, making the present continuous tense "is using" more appropriate. "used" would imply a past, completed action, not the current action of taking Tom to the dentist.

Therefore, Option 4, "belongs, is using," is the only option that correctly uses the present simple tense to describe the current ownership of the car and the present continuous tense to describe the ongoing action of using the car.

Option 3, "John has been living in Egypt since 1942," is the grammatically correct sentence. Here's why:

1. Explanation for Option 3:

   • The phrase "has been living" is in the present perfect continuous tense, which is used to describe an action that started in the past and is still continuing in the present. The use of "since 1942" indicates the starting point of the action, making it clear that John began living in Egypt in 1942 and continues to live there up to the present time. This construction is grammatically correct and appropriately conveys the intended meaning.

2. Explanation for why the other options are incorrect:

   • Option 1: "John has been living in Egypt for 1942."

     • This option is incorrect because "for 1942" is not a proper expression of time duration. The word "for" is used with a period of time (e.g., "for 10 years"), not a specific point in time like a year. Therefore, the sentence is grammatically incorrect.

   • Option 2: "John had lived in Egypt for 1942."

     • This option uses the past perfect tense "had lived," which is used to describe an action that was completed before another action in the past. However, "for 1942" is not a correct expression of time duration, as explained earlier. Additionally, without a subsequent past action to provide context, the use of the past perfect tense is inappropriate here.

   • Option 4: "John have lived in Egypt since 1942."

     • This option is incorrect because "have lived" is not the correct verb form for the singular subject "John." The correct form should be "has lived." Additionally, while "since 1942" is correctly used to indicate the starting point, the verb form error makes the sentence grammatically incorrect.

In summary, Option 3 is the only sentence that correctly uses the present perfect continuous tense with the appropriate time expression "since 1942," making it the grammatically correct choice.

1. Explanation for Option 2 (came, was):

Option 2 is the correct answer because it uses the past simple tense for both verbs, which is appropriate for describing actions and states that occurred in the past. The sentence "When I first came to this house, it was a very quiet area" indicates that both the action of coming to the house and the state of the area being quiet happened at a specific time in the past. The past simple tense is used to describe completed actions or situations that are no longer true in the present, which fits the context of the sentence perfectly.

2. Explanation for why the other options are incorrect:

• Option 1 (comes, is): This option uses the present simple tense for both verbs. The present simple tense is used for habitual actions or general truths, not for specific past events. Since the sentence refers to a specific time in the past when the speaker first came to the house, the present simple tense is inappropriate.

• Option 3 (coming, is): This option uses the present continuous tense for the first verb and the present simple tense for the second verb. The present continuous tense is used for actions happening right now or around the current time, which does not fit the context of the sentence that refers to a past event. Additionally, the use of the present simple tense for "is" suggests a current state, which contradicts the past context of the sentence.

• Option 4 (come, are): This option uses the base form of the verb "come" and the present simple tense for "are." The base form is not appropriate for indicating a past action, and the present simple tense for "are" suggests a current state, which does not align with the past context of the sentence. The sentence requires a past tense to accurately describe the past event and state.

In summary, Option 2 correctly uses the past simple tense to describe both the action and the state in the past, making it the appropriate choice for the sentence.

Option 1, "tried, heard," is the correct answer because it uses the simple past tense, which is appropriate for describing actions that were completed in the past. In this sentence, both actions—Peter trying to come in quietly and his mother hearing him—are events that occurred at a specific time in the past. The simple past tense is used to indicate that these actions are completed and are not ongoing or habitual.

1. Explanation for Option 1:

   • "Tried" is the simple past tense of "try," indicating that Peter's attempt to come in quietly happened at a specific time in the past and is now complete.
   • "Heard" is the simple past tense of "hear," showing that Peter's mother heard him at that same specific time in the past. The use of the simple past tense for both verbs aligns the actions as completed events in the past.

2. Explanation for why other options are incorrect:

   • Option 2: "trying, hears"

     • "Trying" is the present participle form, which is not appropriate here because it suggests an ongoing action, not a completed one. "Hears" is the simple present tense, which is used for habitual actions or general truths, not specific past events.

   • Option 3: "was trying, was hearing"

     • Both verbs are in the past continuous tense, which is used to describe actions that were ongoing in the past. However, the context of the sentence suggests completed actions rather than ongoing ones. The past continuous tense would imply that the actions were in progress, which does not fit the context of the sentence.

   • Option 4: "is trying, hears"

     • "Is trying" is the present continuous tense, indicating an action currently in progress, and "hears" is the simple present tense. Both are inappropriate for describing past events, as the sentence clearly refers to actions that have already been completed.

In conclusion, Option 1 is the correct choice because it accurately uses the simple past tense to describe two completed actions that occurred in the past.

Let us stay here, while it is raining.

Explanation:

• Why Option 1 (is raining) is correct: The sentence "Let us stay here, while it is raining" uses the present continuous tense ("is raining") to describe an action (raining) that is happening at the moment of speaking. The phrase "Let us stay here" implies a present decision based on a current condition. The present continuous tense perfectly aligns with this, indicating that the rain is currently falling, and therefore, staying is the sensible course of action. It describes an ongoing situation that is influencing the present decision.

• Why Option 2 (was raining) is incorrect: "Was raining" is in the past continuous tense. Using "was raining" would imply that the rain was happening in the past, but it's not necessarily happening now. The decision to stay ("Let us stay here") is a present decision, so it needs to be linked to a present condition (the rain). The past tense doesn't logically connect to the present decision.

• Why Option 3 (has been raining) is incorrect: "Has been raining" is in the present perfect continuous tense. This tense indicates an action that started in the past and is continuing into the present. While it could be argued that this is possible, it's less direct and less common in this simple sentence structure. The simple present continuous ("is raining") is a more straightforward and natural way to express the immediate reason for staying. The present perfect continuous often implies a duration or consequence that isn't explicitly needed in this context.

• Why Option 4 (had been raining) is incorrect: "Had been raining" is in the past perfect continuous tense. This tense describes an action that started in the past, continued for some time, and finished before another point in the past. It doesn't fit the context of a present decision to stay based on a current condition. It would imply the rain had stopped, which contradicts the reason for wanting to stay.

Option 2, "had already left," is the correct answer because it uses the past perfect tense correctly. The past perfect tense (had + past participle) is used to describe an action that was completed before another action in the past. In this sentence, Monisha's arrival at the bus stand is the second action in the past. The bus leaving is the action that happened before she arrived. Therefore, "had already left" accurately conveys that the bus departed before Monisha reached the bus stand.

Here's why the other options are incorrect:

• Option 1: was already left: This is grammatically incorrect. The passive voice construction "was left" requires a subject that is being acted upon. In this case, the bus is the actor (leaving), not the recipient of the action. Also, "was already left" doesn't clearly establish the sequence of events as effectively as the past perfect.

• Option 3: already left: While "already left" is understandable, it's grammatically incomplete in this context. It lacks the auxiliary verb "had" to form the past perfect tense, which is necessary to clearly indicate that the bus's departure happened before Monisha's arrival. Using the simple past "already left" implies a closer temporal relationship between the two events than is likely intended.

• Option 4: has been already left: This uses the present perfect passive tense, which is inappropriate. The present perfect tense connects a past action to the present. Since the sentence describes two past events (Monisha arriving and the bus leaving), the present perfect is not suitable. Furthermore, the passive voice construction is incorrect for the same reason as Option 1.